Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Iaconetti v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 286–87. "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). 2019See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 277-78 . "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial -3- court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). [W]hen a represented defendant files a pro se rule 3.170(l) motion based on allegations giving rise to an adversarial relationshi | 5 | 5 |
Sheppard v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 286–87. "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). 2019See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 277-78 . "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial -3- court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). [W]hen a represented defendant files a pro se rule 3.170(l) motion based on allegations giving rise to an adversarial relationshi | 3 | 3 |
Boule v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 286–87. "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). 2019See Sheppard, 17 So. 3d at 277-78 . "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial -3- court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (alteration in original) (quoting Iaconetti v. State, 869 So. 2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). [W]hen a represented defendant files a pro se rule 3.170(l) motion based on allegations giving rise to an adversarial relationshi | 3 | 3 |
Rivera v. Stategreen1 sentence2005See Rivera v. State, 746 So.2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (finding a defendant's claim that he could not comprehend the nature and consequences of his plea due to the effects of his medication for mental illness facially sufficient in the context of postconviction relief). "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Boule v. State, 884 So.2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 2 | 1 | 1 |
Cherry v. Stategreen1 sentence2004Because Boule filed his motion after sentencing, it is governed by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170( l ), which permits a motion to withdraw plea pursuant to the grounds specified in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)(a)-(e). "[W]hen a defendant files a facially sufficient motion to withdraw a plea, the trial court must either afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing or accept the defendant's allegations in the motion as true except to the extent that they are conclusively refuted by the record." Iaconetti v. State, 869 So.2d 695, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); see also | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2008In Williams v. State, 924 So.2d 897 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), the defendant claimed ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel failed to convey to him the statutory maximum for the crime charged prior to his rejection of the State's plea offer. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Snodgrass v. State
green
1 sentence2004Daniel, 865 So.2d at 661 ; Snodgrass, 837 So.2d at 508 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Daniel v. State
green
1 sentence2004Daniel, 865 So.2d at 661 ; Snodgrass, 837 So.2d at 508 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Jones v. State
green
1 sentence1982Rule 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P., indicates that a motion for post-conviction relief may be denied without an evidentiary hearing if “the files and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.... ” See also Jones v. State, 384 So.2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Brown v. State
green
1 sentence1982On the first appeal, 418 So.2d 464 (Fla.1982), we affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded with instructions that the trial court “append those portions of the record which demonstrate that the prisoner is entitled to no relief or, in the alternative, to afford the defendant an evidentiary hearing on grounds one and two.” In response, the trial court denied petitioner’s motion for post-conviction relief and appended the transcript of the plea conference which led to defendant’s conviction. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.